A universal standard of masculinity and femininity exists: proved here

[Trader]

Read below and then take the test for yourself

Pook mentioned that the key to attractiveness is embracing your masculine traits (while also embracing some feminine traits which makes you relatable to the opposite sex, but that is another post all together)

Now, of course, the feminists and wimpy guys out there say:

'Well, what do you mean by masculine? What do you mean by feminine? There is no such universal standard, those terms have no intrinsic meaning. These terms are just superimposed on us by the random dictates of culture and society.'

If that is the case, then the old saying: 'Beauty is the eye of the beholder' should hold true, since if there is no universal standard of femininity, then there is no universal standard of beauty for a female face, and every man should come up with a different rating for a female face.

Now I grant the notion that a girl you might rate as a 9, I might rate as a 7. Yes, there are differences in personal taste. However, I don't think there are extreme differences.

Take for example the following 2 pictures below. Which face do you find more attractive, the left or the right?

http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn8251/dn8251-1_650.jpg








I find the face on the left to be more attractive than the face on the right, and I guarantee you would too. There appears to be a universal standard of beauty. Again, you may rate the face on the left a 7, I might rate it a 6 due to differences in personal taste. But every guy should rate the face on the left as being more beautiful than the face on the right, this is the universal standard of femininity at work.

Notice how the face on the left has higher cheekbones AND the distance from her lip to her chin is smaller, compared to the face on the right.

The face on the left also has a rounder chin. These are classic feminine characteristics.


Now, if there are universal standards of feminine physical traits, and masculine physical traits, one can safely conclude that there do exist universal feminine personality traits as well as masculine personality traits.

 

[Neon Owl]

So, you're saying I should get plastic surgery to make myself look more masculine?

 

[Trader]

So, you're saying I should get plastic surgery to make myself look more masculine?

Masculinity can show up in your facial appearance, and also in your personality.

Thankfully, girls weigh the latter infinitely times more than the former, so no need to go under the knife.

 

[Zarky]

LOL to summarize OP's argument: If you don't agree with me, you're wrong, because my argument is right. And I can prove it's right because those who disagree with it are wrong. They're wrong because the argument is right, and it's right because those who disagree with it are wrong.

Great proof OP Might want to read up on your Aristotelian logic though.

 

[Trader]

LOL to summarize OP's argument: If you don't agree with me, you're wrong, because my argument is right. And I can prove it's right because those who disagree with it are wrong. They're wrong because the argument is right, and it's right because those who disagree with it are wrong.

You are speaking for yourself

Great proof OP Might want to read up on your Aristotelian logic though.

It is not aristotellian logic, actually it's the exact opposite from that.

I am using inductive reasoning, which is inference. Unfortunately for you, you fail to comprehend the difference. But feel free to keep talking and to keep digging your own grave.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

here's a great book that treats in detail the idea of universal standards and pre-programmed preferences in humans.

Free from petty internet bickering as well.

The Blank Slate and The Modern Denial of Human Nature

 

[Zarky]

I am using inductive reasoning, which is inference. Unfortunately for you, you fail to comprehend the difference. But feel free to keep talking and to keep digging your own grave.

heheehe you're not using any reasoning at all, is my point. Every time you try to say that "All men--" or "All women--" you're going to be wrong. Every time.

How is this statement "reasoning:"

I find the face on the left to be more attractive than the face on the right, and I guarantee you would too.

Thanks for that proof! So convincing! Actually I didn't, I found them approximately the same level of attractiveness (actually, both were pretty non-attractive to me).

There appears to be a universal standard of beauty.

Yes because you proved it with the previous statement! Your "guarantee" is failproof!

Again, you may rate the face on the left a 7, I might rate it a 6 due to differences in personal taste.

But I thought you said that personal taste doesn't come into play, standards of beauty are "universal." ???

But every guy should rate the face on the left as being more beautiful than the face on the right, this is the universal standard of femininity at work.

Again, the "every guy should" statement. Hardly a logical conclusion. "Every guy should" love blondes with big titties, but guess what, not all guys do.

So, I reiterate, you said in essence:

"This one face I find more attractive, therefore every guy should as well, and therefore it is."

There's no logical nexus there. Aristotle would be sad. Quit trying to make the facts fit your foregone conclusions.

Tell you what, go out and survey 1000 guys. If 100% of them pick the face that you said "every guy should" pick, then I'll believe you.

Or is your argument that all the guys who pick the "wrong" face are either closet homosexual or are lying? That, then, is a purely circular argument, and also fails. The argument would then be: "All men find Face X attractive. And all the men who say they don't find Face X attractive are either lying or are gay. Because only liars or gay men would not find Face X more attractive. Therefore Face X is more attractive." That is the quintessential circular argument.

I'm not sure why y'all aren't picking up on this. Every time somebody comes up with a semblance of an argument trying to prove some sort of "universal" behavior when it comes to humans, all they have to do is look around a little for their argument to be totally shot down. For the 7 billion people on the planet there are 7 billion different sets of likes and dislikes. Deal with it.

Tell you what, post those faces somewhere on the internet and let men vote on them. Or go around to all the dudes you know in real life who you don't think are gay or liars. I bet that the one you said "every man should" find most attractive wouldn't get more than 60% of the vote.

Clearly, y'all have some sort of vested interest in people believing your generalizations when it comes to human nature, because neither evidence nor logic uphold your argument.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

The feminine or masculine physical characteristics is rarely a debatable issue for people who'd disagree with setting definitive gender traits. Obviously masculine traits are going to include more muscularity, square jawline, body / facial hair, etc. Feminine traits are obvious hip to waist ratio, breasts, lack of body hair, less muscularity, higher voice, etc.

These aren't going to be debated too vigorously by people seeking to redefine gender, although you'll get the occasional argument about how some women can out-muscle some men, and some men are more caring and compassionate than some women, etc. The basis of the argument will always go something like this; gender is a social construct and can thus be redefined to better society by removing gender biases and encouraging more gender neutral, androgynous attitudes in society. Gender is more nurture than nature.

The opposite argument is one of a looser biological determinism. Gender is primarily defined by by our biology - more testosterone prompts masculine physical traits as well as behaviors, etc. There is no denying the biological differences in the sexes; beyond the obvious outward manifestations there is also brain function, genetic markers, hormonal differences, etc. all of which prompt specifically masculine or feminine characteristics, innate tendency, aptitudes and deficiencies. This perspective, while not denying the importance of social influence, leans more to nature over nurture.

 

[Jitterbug]

Social engineering can in fact influence our hormonal balance, thus making us either more masculine or more feminine. Nurture plays a huge part, but still, it's always gonna be Nature's b!tch.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

"Science and Mother Nature are in a marriage where Science is always surprised to come home and find Mother Nature blowing the neighbor." - Justin's Dad

 

[Iceberg]

Now, of course, the feminists and wimpy guys out there say:

'Well, what do you mean by masculine? What do you mean by feminine? There is no such universal standard, those terms have no intrinsic meaning. These terms are just superimposed on us by the random dictates of culture and society.'

That's not really a sign of wimpyness or feminism. It seems like a perfectly logical point to raise.

It'd make me far more of a wimp to blindly accept your opinion as fact.

 

[Trader]

That's not really a sign of wimpyness or feminism. It seems like a perfectly logical point to raise.

It'd make me far more of a wimp to blindly accept your opinion as fact.

Feel free to keep arguing there is no universal standard of masculinity, in the meantime girls continue to flock to *men* who have these rare qualities

 

[Iceberg]

Feel free to keep arguing there is no universal standard of masculinity, in the meantime girls continue to flock to *men* who have these rare qualities

The hell is this guy talking about?

Of course there are things that represent masculinity. Sharp jawline. Broad shoulders. Deep voice. Those are masculine in every culture. Who's going to argue against that? The male in damn near every species of animal has masculine traits (size, strength). What's your next big revelation? The wetness of water?

I'm just saying that your notion that anyone who disagrees with you is wimpy or feminist is stupid.

What's there to disagree with? Breasts and child-bearing thighs are feminine traits. We as men are genetically drawn to such things. Some men might like smaller breasts or slimmer thighs on a woman, but in a "universal" sense, heterosexual men are going to be attracted to a woman's feminine features. No s***.

 

[Trader]

The hell is this guy talking about?

Of course there are things that represent masculinity. Sharp jawline. Broad shoulders. Deep voice. Those are masculine in every culture. Who's going to argue against that? The male in damn near every species of animal has masculine traits (size, strength). What's your next big revelation? The wetness of water?

It's not that obvious, if it were, this site would not exist, and you would not be here

 

[Nutz]

So this is what passes for an attractive man these days? No wonder society is going down the toilet.

 

[Greasy Pig]

So this is what passes for an attractive man these days? No wonder society is going down the toilet.

Ha ha, women are so fvcking lame. Yet I see it all the time, the tattooed freaks with sideways caps, sweatbands half up their forearms and baggy pants are surrounded by stunning women.
Jealous? A bit, I can admit that. It's just that I can understand some women finding that look cool but I would have expected different from really hot women.
I guess crackwh0res come in many different guises.

 

[squirrels]

I found them approximately the same level of attractiveness (actually, both were pretty non-attractive to me).

This.

 

[Arts]

I actually thought the one on the right to be more attractive. The one on the left had somewhat pudgy cheeks, while the one on the right has a higher nose and better lip definition.

 

[Todd Preston]

baha hahahah!

"Man...there really are a lot of idiots in this bar!"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/15/two-idiots-walk-into-a-ba_n_648317.html

Dude...you need some glasses...some BIG THICK ONES!

I actually thought the one on the right to be more attractive. The one on the left had somewhat pudgy cheeks, while the one on the right has a higher nose and better lip definition.

 

[Trader]

I found them approximately the same level of attractiveness (actually, both were pretty non-attractive to me).

I try to refrain from attacks on people's stupidity, but this is just getting ridiculous.

The point is not that both are unattractive, the point is not that both are about the same level of attractiveness, the point is, the picture on the left is MORE attractive because there were slight altercations in her face that enhanced her femininity. The picture on the left is universally more attractive on the right, even if it's only by .000000000000000000001 which means there is a definition of femininity.

If you want to argue that the picture on the right is more attractive, that is one thing. But your comment is just stupidity at its finest, no wonder girls require a guy to always be smarter than her. Stupidity is annoying.